Venturing into the unknown future ---A future that may or may not come ---Part 1 --- Installment 2

Road to 2012 by Dennis L. Pearson

(c) 2008/2009/2010/2011 by Dennis L. Pearson All Rights Reserved --- No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, without permission from the author.

There are good Presidents and there are great Presidents and there may be a President that issomething still more … A President who belongs to the Ages.

On the opposite side, failed Presidencies have periodically occurred in American history and the administration of Jimmy Carter despite somewhat welcomed accomplishments is considered in this category…By the Wall Street Journal Poll conducted in 2005, the Carter Administration is ranked 34th … Only the following Presidents are rated worse: JohnTyler, Millard Fillmore, Andrew Johnson, Franklin Pierce, Warren G. Harding, and James Buchanan. … Now, when Obama ran for President in 2008 there was a cry from his opponents or detractors that his Administration was destined to be Carter II... But Obama in 2008 had a different take --- he pinned the label of Bush III on his opponent John McCain, the Republican Senator from Arizona; and that statement stuck to McCain much as Cactus prickly pines stickto our clothes when we walk in the desert.

After his November 4 lost, McCain met with Obama for the first time since the election at the president-elect's transition headquarters in Chicago on November 17, 2008.

The two pledged a "new era of reform" to solve the US economic crisis, transform energy policy and safeguard national security.

"It is in this spirit that we had a productive conversation today about the need to launch a newera of reform where we take on government waste and bitter partisanship in Washington in order to restore trust in government, and bring back prosperity and opportunity for every hard-working American family," Obama and the Arizona senator said in a joint statement.

"We hope to work together in the days and months ahead on critical challenges like solving our financial crisis, creating a new energy economy, and protecting our nation's security."

But as it happened, John McCain did not buy into Obama's social agenda. The Arizona Senator stood with the Republican minority as it distanced itself from Obama's and the Democratic Party's bid to takeover one-sixth of the American economy through its Health Care legislation. The Senator stood with the Republican Party on its no vote in regard to Obama's deficit escalating Stimulus package... Said McCain: “The whole point, Mr. President, is to enact tax cuts and spending measures that truly stimulate the economy. There are billions and tens of billions of dollars in this bill which will have no effect within three, four, five or more years, or ever. Or ever.” And on security issues, the former Vietnam Prisoner of War was his most critical best as to him the Obama Administration made the home front more vulnerable to terrorist activity ... Excuse me --- Man-made activity ---An Obama Administration reworking of the American language.

Important to note ---- We have seen no clear evidence of Political Bi-partisanship in WashingtonD.C ... As the Democrats who had a clear majority of seats in the House of Representatives and for a short while in the Senate having a Filibuster proof legislative body when Arlen Specter a longtime Republican rewired himself as a Democrat.. The truth is, by tweaking the rules to their favor, the Democratic Party does not need the Republican Party to legislate, and as a consequence of this thinking, they acted accordingly in their consultation with the minority party. All they needed to do was to keep unity in their political Caucus especially in the Senate to move their political objectives forward... But outside of the Washington D.C. beltway, thePresident's personal high approval rating achieved in 2008 quickly evaporated as Independents, Republicans and even Democratic Moderates seemingly did not buy into the policies that Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid were pursuing in their name. And in addition, the political movement known as the Tea Party that arose as a result of these proposed Democratic polices, became dismayed at the arrogance shown by the ruling Majority Party as they tried to make their point of view known. In the entire Health Care debate President Obama said voting about health care was not about him ... But in the end his supporters acted to save the face of the Obama Administration ....... Ignoring public polls that most Americans did not approve the Health Care Plan that they were pursuing ... If Health Care failed all the political energy of the Obama Administration would have been spent ... Andthat would have meant a lame duck administration only a little over one year in Obama's Presidential term with second term in doubt ... Obama dismissed this possibility with the statement that he rather be a successful 1-term President then a 2-term President with few achievements.

A thoughtful Dennis Kennethsson upon hearing that said that a 1 term could be arranged ... But the Sion of the Sons of Liberty Pennsylvania Kahota tribe ... the nation's first resistance to misguided power, doubted that historians would regard it as successful.

Unlike Adlai Stevenson who after defeat to Dwight Eisenhower in 1952 took on Eisenhower again in 1956 with the same results, John McCain who would be in the mid-seventies is not believed to challenge Obama for power in 2012 ... In fact, he had tosurvive a Republican Challenger in the Arizona Senate Primary in 2010 to return to the Senate.Arizona, of course, being the state that riled up Obama's Justice Department and liberal circles by enacting its own immigration law that ordered law enforcement people in the state to enforce the Federal Immigration Law. And, of course, McCain had to be on the right side of that issue in Arizona. The federal position being that the Arizona law addressed an issue that was strictly a federal prerogative and that the law would allow police to engage in racial profiling in addressing the illegal alien situation in Arizona. The Arizona position was that the their law simply reinforces federal law and specifically requires Arizona law officials to enforce the law only when they can justify cause.

Getting back to the issue of who will be the Presidential candidates in 2012 . Odds are very high that a new challenger will emerge from the Republican party to rally its conservative andindependent voices; And that the Democrats would stay pat with Obama in 2012 unless public opinion against the Obama Administration encourages a challenge within the Democratic Party... That is what happened in 1980 when Edward M. Kennedy, long-time Senator of Massachusetts unsuccessfully challenged President Jimmy Carter. To Kennedy'schagrin, while beloved in Massachusetts despite of his noticeable faults, this idolization did not carry forth in the rest of the nation. In the case of Obama this idolization which almost can be called a rock star idolization as well bolstered his image and stature domestically within the United States and the world in 2008 and in 2012 some of this idolization in thedomestic and worldwide media remains but it does have cracks. In this atmosphere Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State is seen rushing around the world to Iraq, South Korea, Afghanistan and other places, her image well insulated and seemingly undamaged unlike Obama's. If Mrs. Clinton has not given up thoughts of becoming the first female President will she see the cracks in Obama's image as an opening to challenge the President in 2012. To undertake thechallenge, she must have assurance that she could beat the President in open political battle for failure would most surely bring to her political oblivion .

Whether we agree or not, a sitting President is often viewed as being there because of the will of God ... Therefore, it is proper for the citizenry in its prayers to God to ask God's guidance in keeping the President safe and in decision making ... The fact is, a failed Presidency is not in the best interests of the nation ... Americans don't wish a President to fail but it can happen ...

Radio personality Rush Limbaugh has questioned whether Barack Obama's agenda is good for America ... Thinking that Obama's political agenda is not good for America ... Limbaugh wants the President to fail ...

According to Saul Alinsky : "Change means movement. Movement means friction. Only in the frictionless vacuum of a nonexistent abstract world can movement or change occur without that abrasive friction of conflict. "

While the Obama Administration always had friction with Conservatives, it seems it is becoming more difficult for them to escape the abrasive friction of conflict among independents and their own.

Then again Saul Alinsky also said this : "Always remember the first rule of power tactics; power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have" ..... So in this case is the seemingly increasing abrasive friction of conflict among his own simply a tactical illusion to confuse their opponents.

In Israeli history, the people against God's wishes asked for a King to replace the system that had prevailed there for ages --- The Judges ... Reluctantly God consented to the will of the people and made it his will ... Thus Saul despite his flaws in personalityand judgment became the first King of Israel ... As it happened because of his exploits in battle, a young boy named David became more popular in Israel then the King causing a negative reaction from the King .... The King wanted David killed and searchedthe land for the elusive lad with no positive results ... But as it happened, David once had the opportunity to take out the King when Saul visited one of the many caves in the Jerusalem area to relieve himself ... Be it noted --- Saul was unaware that David and his band of men were hiding in the same exact cave at that very moment and would be at Saul's mercyhad Saul realized that David was there ... Equally so, David having opportunity to Kill Saul, instead chose to secretly cut of a piece of his robe for later display to the King .... David's attitude then was: "May the Lord judge between you and me. And may the Lord avenge the wrongs you have done to me, but my hand will not touch you."

In some ways Dennis Kennethsson felt the same way about those who gained their position and power through trickery, coercion, and abusing the rules.

In the case of Jimmy Carter, the American system allowed Edward Kennedy to challenge a sitting President ... But Kennedy himself was flawed, and this flaw prevented the Massachusetts Senator from amounting a successful campaign against the President in the Democratic Party ... Yet the Kennedy campaign still had its consequences for thePresident ... Kennedy's campaign opened the door for the Republican Party to mount a seriouschallenge in the name of Ronald Reagan ... And the rest is history.

In 2010 - the Republican Party needing a comeback from its debacle in 2008 worked hard to regain seats in the House and Senate ... Its goal was to take back the House and even the Senate to stop the speeding train of the Democratic agenda ...Obama delighted inhis legislative victories but his approval rating with the public tanked ... The Republican Party hoped to take advantage of this by replacing Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House and with one of their own - namely John Boehner. And in the Senate if they could not get a majority there for themselves, maybe they could oust Harry Reid from the Senate ... In 1994 the Republican Pact for America as promoted by Republican Newt Gingrich won them the House and corralled Bill Clinton's political agenda. But unfortunately for Republicans, their legislative victory brought Clinton to the center of the political spectrum and the Republican Agenda actually benefitedClinton's image for 1996... Against Kansas Senator Bob Dole a Purple Heart World War II Veteran, Bill Clinton actually won back the White House Handily. But Clinton once again had to temper his political agenda with Republican control of the legislature.

Despite his landslide Electoral College election in 2008, Obama felt the need to make an appearance of being a magnanimous and gracious leader by reaching out to his former opponent and also a need to feel the adoration from the people including those that did not support him in his election bid. Some say he adopted a strategy of seeking to keep hisdetractors close at hand and at the appropriate time dump them or throw them under the bus.Obama ran for office in 2008 on the slogan Change that we can believe in … Yes we can. … And in the interim between the election and the pending re-election in 2012 there has been change … So-called Health Care reform came to the people " not simply with words" but with political action that a victorious Obama described as the face of Change in America. The question is whether this change is beneficial for the long-term or a detriment… His most ardent supporters say that with the passage of Health Care Reform so short in his Administration Obama hasearned a honored place in American History ... Yet most observers in making a critique on the first term are more reserved, are more wait and see. For the present they agree that Obama does not enjoy the status of a Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Teddy orFranklin Roosevelt whose famous faces are sculpted on the cliffs of Mount Rushmore or a Ronald Reagan whose supporters say he belongs there as well ... But neither is the first-term President a Warren Harding, or a James Buchanan either … His more conservative critics know what he is ... They say he is a Socialist and a Marxist to the denial of the leftwho say he is a moderate ... Many in his own party are angry that Obama allowed his Health Care reform pass without the Public Option. Conservatives such as Glenn Beck charge that Obama is the new kid on the block following the Progressive push for social change...Such Presidents include Teddy Roosevelt. Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt

... But we in the present note that the President uses his political skills which derived from the likes of Saul Alinsky, Reverend Jeremiah Wright and others to govern like a would be Juan Peron, Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabee …

Saul Alinsky --- 1909 - 1972• Born to Russian-Jewish parents in Chicago in 1909, Saul Alinsky was alleged to be a Communist/Marxist fellow-traveler who helped establish the dual political tactics of confrontation and infiltration that characterized the 1960s and have remained central to all subsequent revolutionary movements in the United States. He never joined theCommunist Party but instead, as David Horowitz puts it, became an avatar of the post-modern left• Though Alinsky is rightfully understood to have been a leftist, his legacy is more methodological than ideological. He identified a set of very specific rules that ordinary citizens could follow, and tactics that ordinary citizens could employ, as a means ofgaining public power. His motto was, "The most effective means are whatever will achieve the desired results."

Achievements• Identified a set of very specific rules that ordinary citizens could follow, and tactics thatordinary citizens could employ, as a means of gaining public power• Created a blueprint for revolution under the banner of "social change"• Two of his most notable modern-day disciples are Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Reverend Jeremiah Wright --- 1941 -Jeremiah Wright was pastor and spiritual advisor to Barack Obama until the two apparently became estranged during the 2008 presidential campaign over Wright's controversial sermons and public remarks. The media frenzy that contributed to the rift came after Wright had already retired as pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's tough South Side, where he had served since 1972 and where Obama had embraced Christianity as a young community organizer in 1988. A scholarly, fiery, gifted African American preacher, Wright was notafraid over the years to criticize U.S. culture and government. In March 2008, a month after hisretirement, a handful of video clips featuring strident excerpts from his sermons found their way into television campaign coverage and were aired repeatedly. In one, Wright said America deserved God's damnation for its hostility toward its own poor and toward other nations. Obama at first defended Wright's "prophetic" voice and Trinity's impressiverecord of community service under his leadership. But the candidate eventually distanced himself from the pastor, most forcefully after Wright's feisty April 2008 performance under questioning at the National Press Club. Obama resigned his Trinity membershipin June 2008, and was elected president that November. Wright's title at Trinity is "pastoremeritus."

Some would like to say that the economic crisis that was raging in the U.S and the world financial markets and industry at the time of Obama's election and transition to office had a tempering impact on his attributed Marxism yet his goal still was to redistribute what was left of the wealth by taxing the wealthy more and redistribute this tax money to the more needy. As stated, this is the Conservative take on the President ... But those who think themselves more enlightened assert that they are making the playing field more fair for all Americans ...With boldness they say, their laws and fixes will never again allow the crises and collapses we have seen the past many years.

It is obvious that Obama's formerChief of Staff Rohm Emmanuel believed that there was no crisis that should go to waste, so whether it be economic stimulus, health care, and financial regulation , it was his advice preference that things be acted upon quickly to the benefit of the Administration's objectives and goals.

To alleviate and solve the apparent crises that faced him, The President-elect directed the Transition's economic team to develop the details of a plan for a two-year, nationwide effort to strengthen the American economy. It centered on jobs rebuilding crumbling roads and bridges, modernizing schools, and making America a leader in alternative energy. Stated Obama: “After another week of devastating economic news, it's clearer than ever that dramatic action is needed to chart a new path for our economy that gets jobs and wages growing again.”

However, in 2010 as the mid-term November elections loomed, the issue for Obama was still the old Clinton slogan ---It's the economy stupid ... In his tours of the nation Obama tried to raise the hopes of the American people by saying that things were improving ... But unemployment still remained very high and still remains high in 2011 ...And Obama's answer to that is that had we not did what we did things would be worse. Perhaps that statement is true and Perhaps that statement is not true. But what we do know is that someday the debtwe are accumulating has to be paid back to the prople or entities that purchased the debt ... Ifwe do not take control of the issues now ... It will be decided in the future : How we shall pay back the debt if we can ... and to whom .. and when this payback will happen .. and what will be the future consequences of this repayment or non-repayment if we default..Back in the late 1960's and early 70's when the U.S.A in Asia was still deeply involved in a non-declared war in Vietnam and butting heads in a cold war with the Union of Socialistic Soviet Republics , the USSR , our relationship with the People's Republic of China was almost non-existent. To us, China was Formosa or Taiwan and the People's Republic's goal was to bring that Island nation back into the Chinese fold . China, a communist state indeed like the USSR, was an under achiever in the world community and had its own hostilities with theUSSR rulers.

But then it happened, U.S. President Richard Nixon went to the People's Republic. It has been said that only the stubborn, ornery, mule-like, Communist hating cold war warrior that Dick Nixon was could do what no other President before him could do ... That is go to China and establish diplomatic relations ... What Nixon wanted was to have the Chinese market opened to Americans and in some ways it has opened to us ... Indeed China has changed its mind set by allowing a certain degree of free market mechanisms inside its Communist state directed bigtent operation. It has sought international investment as well to establish new manufacturing operation and industry inside the borders of that ancient land; and as luck would have it the British Colony of Hong Kong and the Portuguese Colony of Macao were also brought inside the big tent with special charters to govern them. At this moment, only the Nationalistic Nation of Taiwan remains outside the big tent. But diplomatically China has taken over Taiwan's permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council. Economically despite a bump or two , China has grown so much that it is has overtaken the U.S in energy use and it is notuncommon to see the words Made in China attached to many items Americans purchase at the shopping Malls.

We almost bet the farm that Nixon never thought that the Chinese would export more goods to the U.S then we export to China ...But that is what has happened ... And what is more the Chinese took advantage of this trade surplus with the United State to invest in the U.S economy by buying off our debt. It is scary to think that instead of the U.S owning China, China really owns us.

One thing is certain --- we cannot change the past as the pendulum of time has written the final edition of what has occurred in the past. … And, of course, there is no way for us to physically go back to the past to change it. That is a thing that only Hollywood screen writers have attempted … And neither can we physically go forth into the future because once the future arrives it becomes the momentary present soon to become the past … Therefore change that affects the infinite future can only occur in the momentary present; and the momentary present is filled with missed opportunities and extraordinary successes, and unmitigated failure as well as handicaps to progress brought to the momentary present from the short-term and long-term past.

As it happened, in the past four years, a cautious but empowered Obama Administration, wavering between moderation of position and social activism, has not achieved the extraordinary successful American Society it promised despite the passage of health care , financial reform and other items of the Democratic Agenda… In fact, the promised benefitsof Health Care Reform won't actually kick in until after the 2012 election.

Fact is, the President, who had pledged to place diplomacy ahead of confrontation in world affairs, won the Nobel Prize for Peace , a remarkable and controversial honor for a leader only nine months in office. Intended to honor how Obama had altered the nation's diplomaticdirection, the peace prize called attention to how much of the administration's agenda -- from closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay to winding down the war in Afghanistan -- remained undone in 2010 and still is not achieved in as we head into the new election cycle. As far as Iraq is concerned, the Treaty negotiated by the former Bush Administration has brought many U.S troops stationed and fighting there home, but sporadic actions from remaininginsurgents has delayed the timetable for the final pullout of Americans from Iraq.

Personally, Gordon Gordonsson feels the Nobel Peace Prize committee was too quick to confer the award on Obama. He asks what logic existed to nominate Obama in February 2009 when hisadministration had just started and could not have any long-lasting achievements in regard to world peace. He also asks -- what individual, group or nation made this rather surprising nomination which so humbled the President the day the award was announced. Of interest, Obama more than any previous President in the first year of Office has been jetting around the world in Air Force 1 as if he was campaigning for something. And of course, if this nomination and ultimate selection was planned as strategy to increase Obama's stature in the world,we now know why the President traveled so much worldwide and engaged in so many times whatamounted to an apology tour for America's past worldwide and domestic transgression according to new revelation -- The Book of Obama...

Thorbjørn Jagland, Chairman of the Nobel Peace Committee, said the following words in Oslo,Norway December 10, 2009 in presenting the Nobel Peace Prize to Barrack Hussein Obama :

" This year's award must be viewed in the light of the prevailing situation in the world, with great tension, numerous wars, unresolved conflicts and confrontation on many fronts around the world. And, not least, there is the imminent danger of the spread of nuclear weapons, degradation of the environment and global warming. In fact, Time Magazine recently described the decade that is coming to an end as the worst since the end of World War II. From the very first moment of his presidency, President Obama has been trying to create a more cooperative climate which can help reverse the present trend.

He has already "lowered the temperature in the world" in the words of former Peace Prize Laureate Desmond Tutu"

The Committee always takes Alfred Nobel's will as its frame of reference. We are to award the Nobel Peace Prize to the person who, during the "preceding year", meaning in this case since the previous award in December 2008, shall have done the most or the best work "for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses" – to quote from the will.

The question was actually quite simple. Who has done most for peace in the past year? If the question is put in Nobel's terms, the answer is relatively easy to find: it had to be U.S. President Barack Obama. Only rarely does one person dominate international politics to the same extent as Obama, or in such a short space of time initiate so many and such major changes as Obama has done. The question for the Committee was rather whether it would be bold enough to single out the most powerful man in the world, with the responsibility and the obligations that come with the office of the President of the United States.

The Committee came to the conclusion that it must still be possible to award the Nobel Peace Prize to a political leader. We cannot get the world on a safer track without political leadership. And time is short. Many have argued that the prize comes too early. But history can tell us a great deal about lost opportunities.".To summarize --- the Nobel Prize Peace Committee Chairman said that the Prize was awarded for Obama's words of expectations of positive world change rather then his deeds accomplished until then. The Nobel Prize Peace Committee Chairman apparently expects the world to fall into line to Obama's wish list now that he has been anointed a man of peace by that Committee.

One can argue properly that this man of peace continues a war in Iraq and Afghanistan that his predecessor actually had entered into ... But who owns the War in Libya, certainly not Bush, but Obama. And this action in Libya occurred after Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize and during the spreading turmoil in Middle East that saw the spread of protests from Tunisia , Egypt, Yemen, Behrain, Syria and Libya. Libya is headed by Colonel Momar Gadalphi whose government is held responsible for the Lockerbie Plane disaster in Scotland that killed many students from Syracuse Universiyy But Obama maintains the action in Libya is not revenge or a War because there are no American boots on the ground ... However, there is certainly American boots in the sky and these American skyriders are not limiting their calling cards to dropping written Nobel Peace Prize acceptance messages from the sky and food drops.

We repeat === The Nobel Peace Prize Committee has stated "Only rarely does one person dominate international politics to the same extent as Obama, or in such a short space of time initiate so many and such major changes as Obama has done... But frankly, all these changes seem to be merely slight of hand ... We are still in Iraq, Afghanistan... We still hold battlefield captives in Guantanamo ... And in addition to this Obama has a propensity to use unmanned drone bombs whenever and wherever he can --- especially in Pakistan. We wonder: How does the Nobel Committee feel about Obama doing all this in such a short time? Maybe the award was an advance payment on Obama's successful search against Osama Bin Laden which has upset the government of Pakistan to such a point that they want to arrest the Pakistani informers that helped us.

Commenting on the award, President Obama said he did not feel that he deserved to be in the company of so many transformative figures that have been honored by this prize, and whose courageous pursuit of peace has inspired the world. But he added that he also knew that the Nobel Prize had not just been used to honor specific achievements, but also to give momentum to a set of causes. The Prize could thus represent "a call to action"...

Stated Obama; "But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of the military of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 42 other countries – including Norway – in an effort to defendourselves and all nations from further attacks.Still, we are at war, and I'm responsible for thedeployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill, and some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the costs of armed conflict – filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other. "

Then at Oslo, Obama was brave enough to offer this admission: "I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work, and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.

We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth: We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations – acting individually or in concert – will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.

I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King Jr. said in this same ceremony years ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. King's life work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there's nothing weak – nothing passive – nothing naïve – in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.

But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A non-violent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism – it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason. "

Before we go on, it ought to be noted that as a Candidate for President, Barack Obama made the promise to start the withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq immediately upon taking office ... Of course, this promised withdrawal was made by Obama when an increase in military manpower also known as a Surge was authorized by the prior Bush Administration. Reaction to the Bush initiative by most of the Democratic leadership was typical. It was their belief that the Surge would fail. But as events proved, the Bush Administration Surge in Iraq did not fail, it actually succeeded in improving conditions in Iraq. And later, the Obama Administration hoped the same strategy in Afghanistan would work in the same manner. Then too, the fact is, the prior Bush Administration in negotiating and implementing the U.S.-Iraqi Security agreement took Obama off the hook to carry out his promise to withdrawal all U.S. Armed forces fromIraq immediately upon taking office … The agreement required all U.S. forces to withdrawalfrom Iraqi territory no later than December 31, 2011. And what-is-more, the agreement stipulated that all U.S. combat forces shall withdraw from Iraqi cities, villages, and localities no later than the time at which Iraqi Security Forces assume full responsibility forsecurity in an Iraqi province provided that such withdrawal is completed no later than June 30, 2009. The U.S. Iraqi Security Agreement was, of course,necessitated because a United Nations SecurityCouncil resolution authorizing the presence of UnitedStates and multi-national troops to operate freely inIraq would expire at the end of 2008. Failure to have such an agreement in place would mean that theUnited States and its multi-national allies would suddenly be considered as operating outside of International Law if military operations continued .Obama as a new President, certainly would not have wanted to assume the status of receiving international rebuke from the international community so early in his Presidency. One might ask -- if this American withdrawal of its military forces has been successful and peace andstability becomes the normal domestic condition in Iraqi cities, hamlets, countryside and Provinces -- than peace prize consideration should have been given to the former George Bush administration for answering the challenge and establishing a stable, peace oriented government in Iraq .. But hell will freeze over before that happens.

There are those who will not forgive George Bush after 9/11 for passing the U.S. Patriot Act whose rationale was to safe guard the American homeland from new terrorist attacks that threaten additional infrastructure and American lives ... For his pre-emptive attack on Afghanistan to unseat the puritanical and Al-Qaeda supporting Taliban government and then into Iraq to unseat Saddam Hussein and root out the alleged weapons of mass destruction. ...Clearly, Bush detractors believe the Iraq War was unnecessary in the first place ... It was a war for Oil and a war to support the new world order ... Saddam Hussein despite all his faults and brutality to the Kurds in Iraq is alleged to stand in the way for the establishment of a new world order and because of that had to step aside one way or the other.

But of interest, when the decision to invade Iraq happened most Democrats in the House and Senate were actually on Board citing intelligence reports of Weapons of Massed Destruction. Then gradually, the attitude of most Democrats changed on the issue ... Some went as far as saying that these reports were fabricated or deliberately distorted by intelligence officials loyal to the Bush Administration. In defense of the intelligence community, let us assume thatthese reports were not deliberately distorted but dated . That much of the WMD material either had deteriorated beyond usefulness or were transferred to a new site outside Iraq. Then too, Saddam Hussein, himself, may have created a ruse allowing intelligence personnel to think that a large amounts of WMD material remained there, and of, course in the end he paid the ultimate penalty for playing games. It's not nice to fool Uncle Sam and his allies. But inany Case, George Bush to his critics was the devil incarnated, the reverse of what Obama is reported to be.